Comments on: We predicted there was no tax ‘windfall’

By: SeeSaw

SeeSaw — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:53:18 +0000

Thankfully, the state of CA does not tax SS income.

By: DavidfromLosGatos

DavidfromLosGatos — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 03:11:12 +0000

There are many income tax states that do not tax certain kinds of retirement income. Even high income tax Hawaii does not tax Ca government pensions – but does tax a self-contributed 401K.

IMO, it will be several years, not just a few months, before the effects of Prop 30 are really known. Of course, a few heavy hitters can make a big difference, e.g., the Phil Mickelsons. Much easier for individual sports like golf and boxing (RE Manny Pacquiao: isn’t that why the big money fights are tradionally in Vegas?). Team sports and concert-style entertainers are stuck with CA venues, but I caould understand the players trying to at least mitigate by living elsewhere, and only being in CA for days/games in which they have no choice (ala Derek Jeter in NY).

By: Ian Random

Ian Random — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 19:45:14 +0000

My mom and dad were public sector workers in Kulifornia. They just wanted a job and could care less about the union. I too use the term union thugs, but only those that are actively supporting their union. Come to think of it, I don’t seem to remember a lot of opportunity in Santa Cruz outside of the public sector thanks to the public sector.

By: Ftheunions

Ftheunions — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:49:52 +0000

Although normally not fighting in California, Manny Pacquiao has sure responded to the high tax rates and is looking to hold his next fight outside of the U.S. That likely means a large chunk of change the treasury will not see. Good for him! So much for people not responding to higher rates of anything. My initial surprise that two Stanford professors would publish this quickly dissipated when I learned it was two sociologists–the true bottom feeders of academia!

By: SeeSaw

SeeSaw — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 02:45:20 +0000

I think I did have a shirt Jimmy, but I believe it was blue with something orange on it. A friend of a friend sent it to me from another city. I used the term “union colleagues”, because those were the people being dissed in the post, to which I was responding. I was in an association that required dues of approximately $12/month. There was no activisim in our group, so to speak, and membership was not a requirement of my employment. I had more non-union colleagues than I did union colleagues, if that’s what you are trying to make a case of. I am a people lover first; I want to see everyone employed. I try to put forth an honest opinion on issues, along with factual information, if I have such. People like you are the ones who have nothing of your own to go on, so you resort to insults and condesending of those you don’t even know. I pity your ilk.

By: jimmydeeoc

jimmydeeoc — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 23:29:30 +0000

“I’m glad you were never any union colleague of mine.”

LOL…..

Those of us who are not state apparatchiks typically refer to each another as “co-workers”, Seesaw.

Telling that you consider co-workers first and foremost as “union colleagues”

Telling, but not surprising.

Tell us, Seesaw…….do you wear your purple shirt on Eugene Deb’s birthday, you know, in commemoration?

LOL LOL LOL ………………….

By: Cordo

Cordo — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 22:36:44 +0000

eyeamok says:
the very same [expletive deleted] Union Members

I go to work every day to carry out the programs that are created not by me but by the people the “brain-dead” voters keep returning to office. I have not had a meaningful pay raise in over 20 years and have had to fend off at least two raids on my retirement. Studies how it would take a pay raise of around 60% just to catch my salary up to inflation, In the meantime, I still have to feed, clothe, and house my family while costs are going up. How much more “pain” do you want me to share?

You want less government and lower taxes? Stop asking your government to take care of you and stop electing people who promise you high services and low taxes. Stop blaming me and my co-workers for your problems. You had a chance to change things in the last election, and you didn’t take it. You want to know who’s to blame for this mess? You should check out the guy behind the guy in front of you.

Caliornia did at one time assert tax on the incomes of people who had retired and moved out of the state. The problem was that the only people they could enforce this theory against were state workers, because the state could take the tax out of their retirement before they paid it. Congress stopped that.

BTW, Plato once said that the use of profanity denotes a simple mind trying to express itself. You should rememeber that.

By: Donkey

Donkey — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:50:51 +0000

Dyspeptic, the RAGWUS feeders like ntheoc always whine when told the truth about their cabal of crooks.

I am lookingforward to the state going broke, we need so social unrest to get us back to basics!! 🙂

By: eyeamok

eyeamok — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:12:48 +0000

” Save yourself the trouble–what you propose is very federally, unconstitutional”

Thats pretty funny, I thought Involuntary Servitude was Unconstitutional also, but that doesn’t stop the Asshole Union Members and their Bought and Paid for Politicians from ENSLAVING OUR CHILDREN IN DEBT THAT CAN NEVER BE PAID OFF, Or Enslaving them in DEBT to PAY FOR THE WANTS OF THEIR PARENTS WHILE RECEIVING ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT. But Hey I was always against Marxism. Seig Hiel

By: SeeSaw

SeeSaw — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:19:15 +0000

My aren’t you refined, eyamok! I’m glad you were never any union colleague of mine. No, I don’t think you could make that fly! The Federal Government is the entity that decided retirees did not have to pay taxes to the state where they earned the money, if they no longer live in that state. Save yourself the trouble–what you propose is very federally, unconstitutional.